Will the graphics for consoles ever catch up to the PCs graphics?

[QUOTE="RyviusARC"][QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

You know that argument about how its never Hermits that start these? Well I think they are wrong by about a very large margin.

Also TC, you forgot the beginning of this generation. You know, the ones where consoles were actually MORE powerful then PC's for about a year (2 with the 360)? Or do you just want to block that from your memory because you said something that doesn't make sense?

Its going to happen again next gen too most likely, and when it does elitists will just mysteriously disappear until Crysis 4 comes out 3 years later and they can act like PC was always on top.

SPYDER0416

That must be why PC's didn't have a single title that matched the graphics in Gears of War back then. Yup, makes perfect sense.

Sometimes I feel ashamed when I tell people I'm a PC gamer, just because I don't want them to assume I'll make statements like this all the time.

[QUOTE="harshv82"]

[QUOTE="Jankarcop"]

still alot better than the $1000 estimate I quoted

Jankarcop

It's not fair either. You're comparing a 2005 console to 2011 PC market. In 2005, the PC hardware to match up with console would be around $1000 - 1200. But ofcourse in 2005 the consoles were a lot expensive than what they are today.

this thread said nothing about price. how is it not fair? you making up rules again?

Did you even understand what I've written? Or just trying to take things out of context?

[QUOTE="KingsMessenger"]

[QUOTE="Chris_Williams"]again, this guy responded saying consoles don't have the latest hardware, the ps3 had the cell processor which was pretty advance for its time 5-6 years ago. But yeah maybe that was a bad example. But the ps3 still had blu-ray and was the cheapest blu-ray on the market, so bam.Chris_Williams

I would place the Cell behind the Core 2 line of processors as far as CPUs go. It has its own set of advantages and things that can be done with it(and developers have put that to good use), but the Core 2 processors still have the Cell beat purely as a CPU.

I am right in some ways and wrong in others if you want to get technical. Personally, I find the Cell rather interesting, but honestly as a CPU, I find it tedious. It works in servers because it is far easier to manage massively parallel CPUs than it would be to manage massively parallel GPUs, but as a discrete processor I think it is kind of stupid. The "advantages" of the Cell aren't really advantages IMO because in most cases a programmable GPU(unified shaders, though nVidia took it a lot further later on down the line with Fermi) does all of those things better anyway. And as a CPU it is just doesn't match up. It is great for servers, but to put it in a console was kind of dumb honestly... If they had spent all that money on making a better GPU and stuck with a standard CPU, I think they would have been far better off.

There'll be a jump once next generation consoles hit, but that period of parity won't last long.

look, before every pc fanboy starts quoting me and trying to make their precious pc's look great, i never said pc's couldn't do it, the guy i was responding to said consoles would never have the latest hardware when the ps3 had a pretty advance "at that time" processing power that even most computers didn't have or had but it was faster with the ps3 5-6 years ago. Also, you don't know what your talking about, unless you actually utilize these functions and actually tried to replicate a black hole vibration to be able to justify and say "its just running math functions". Chris_Williams

It is just math. Incredibly complicated math, but math none-the-less. Everything a computer does is math, from displaying pixels to running Artificial Intelligence algorithms... That is all a computer is good for. That is all it EVER does. Every single sound that a computer generates and every image displayed is the result of math. Computer science is applied math in many ways... Any function that you can run on one computer CAN be run on another, in that respect it is rather binary(pun intended). It is just a matter of the speed.

Are PC gamers really this insecure? These threads are getting boring really, really fast.Sgt_Crow

Sorry about that, I didn't notice that there were so many of these threads.

the only way would be if they made ps3 a pc in essence...by allowing you to upgrade components... i believe one day it will come..

as of now you can upgrade your memory by buying a harddrive for xbox360... or adding wireless with attachments...

maybe one day they willl allow users to upgrade the processor and videocards of ps3s....

until that day...consoles will never catch up...because they cant evolve... a ps3 will stay a ps3. A pc can evolve with upgrades...

They do not need to. Graphics are fine on the PS3 and 360. If someone can't look at Gears 3 or God of war 3 and be happy then that is their problem. It is getting to the point that graphics are all that matters. When games become to realistic the price will go up and the fun factor will probably go down. I want my games to look and play like games.

Being system wars I am sure most people are getting excited about graphics because the sex scenes and half naked women will give them a reason to go to bed at 2:30 in the afternoon.

Someone starts a thread about a discussion of PC graphics.

Everyone starts lambasting all PC gamers as insecure scumbags.

Someone starts a thread about a discussion of console graphics (Uncharted, God of War, Gears of War etc.)

Everyone starts saying BEST GRAFX EVAR, CRYSIS KILLAR, LOL PC PWNED.

Never change System Wars, never change.

I'm just curious.

GameboyTroy

They do not need to. Graphics are fine on the PS3 and 360. If someone can't look at Gears 3 or God of war 3 and be happy then that is their problem. It is getting to the point that graphics are all that matters. When games become to realistic the price will go up and the fun factor will probably go down. I want my games to look and play like games.

Being system wars I am sure most people are getting excited about graphics because the sex scenes and half naked women will give them a reason to go to bed at 2:30 in the afternoon.

WarTornRuston

Yes, wen next generation comes. Then after 4 - 5 months, they'll be vastly outdated like every single time trough out history.

Lolwut? Technology goes forward, consoles stay behind.

There's no way they can "catch up". It's impossible.

no because without advancements in pc technology, consoles can't advance.

[QUOTE="wis3boi"]

Nope. Consoles have to stay on the cheap side of things, they can never have the latest hardware.

Chris_Williams

When this gen of consoles came out, any SLI system PC at the time could out perform them. About a month later the new gen of GPU's came out which, again, outperformed the consoles.

So no. Consoles never caught up, and never will.

It's PC's push on GPU's and CPU's that DRIVE console technology, NOT the other way around.

Nope because consoles are always newely updated with tech like PCs are.